Tuesday, October 8, 2013

Socioeconomic
indicators of support/opposition and willingness to pay for offshore wind development in the Great Lakes

In 2009 Scandia, a Norwegian offshore wind developer,
proposed a utility-scale offshore wind (OSW) farm near Ludington and Pentwater,
Michigan. The project never reached fruition and was rejected – vehemently – by
the nearby communities. Meanwhile, a non-profit group in Evanston, Illinois, has
been considering the idea of offshore wind development but remains hesitant to
launch official development support given how this proposal unfolded.

So, what socioeconomic factors were, and are currently,
indicative of support or opposition for offshore wind development in these two
areas? For my master’s research at the University of Michigan, I and three
other researchers aimed to answer this question in these two regions: 1)
Evanston, Rogers Park, and Wilmette, Illinois and 2) Mason and Oceana Counties,
Michigan. In the main part of the survey, participants were presented with:

1) Industry developed simulations of a 400 megawatt
(MW) OSW farm three (3), six (6), and ten (10) miles from each region’s
respective shoreline; and

2) One positive or negative price impact on their monthly
electricity rates.

Respondents where then asked to vote ‘for’ or ‘against’ each
combination of price impact and offshore wind farm distance.

While some results were surprising, others followed the
cutting-edge, published literature out of the University of Delaware -- the
leading U.S. institution that focuses on public perceptions related to offshore
wind development around the Delaware and Cape Wind projects. Here’s what we found:

Initial (probit) results suggest the variables
for monthly increase/decrease in utility bill price, offshore wind farm siting
distance, and liberal political ideology are statistically significant in
determining the probability of support
for the proposed offshore wind farm.

Mean willingness to pay (WTP) calculations suggest
local communities would incur a social cost from siting a wind farm 3 and 6
miles offshore but a social benefit if it were setback 10 miles for the average
respondent.

We also found notable uncertainty among
respondents regarding not only their current support for offshore wind
development but also in their perception of type and extent of its subsequent
impacts.

Overall, these findings demonstrate a critical need for
education on this technology’s likely environmental, social, and economic
impacts; moreover, they suggest that at some point past 6 miles from the
shoreline, some people are willing to pay more on their electricity bill and
support building an offshore wind farm.

We are currently compiling these findings and expect to
publish them in two peer-reviewed journals later this year. Please do not
hesitate to contact me (lknapp@glc.org) if you’re interested in learning more
about this study or would like to be notified once the results are published.